24 Comments

1. Shocked that the writers indicate that GW was a Fascist – I tend to agree, but it was still a shock.
2. Surprised they seem to indicate that they believe that 9/11 was a false flag operation – likely designed to get us into war.
3. They missed the part about GW being a Christian though, and that as a Christian he saw it as his responsibility to take freedom to the world.
4. The font, especially the J, look uncannily like the font used by the LDS Church, which is a proprietary font… Hmmmm!
5. The LDS Church who fired a professor who had a theory that there were problems with 9/11 – see point 2.
6. They went after Reagan too – Mr. Small government himself, although he increased spending significantly.
7. Finally, the only way out is Jesus Christ…

Are they suggesting we pursue a theocracy instead?!? A theocracy like Iran or other Islamic states?

And which version of Jesus do we pick… The Mormon Jesus, the traditional Christian Jesus…

My sense is that the aim of videos like this is to capture a certain ungovernable and uneducated segment of Mormon society. It’s a narrow segment in terms of American society. Which is why there won’t be many (outside of spaces like this) who’ll bother to raise a protest against the obvious insanity of it all. For those unfamiliar with how this particular formula works its magic on its intended audience, this vid will merit little more than a shrug.

For the rest of us, we understand what Boyd K. Packer meant when he said at the latest Mormon General Conference:

After all that we have correlated and organized, it is now our responsibility to activate the power of the priesthood in the Church.

#1: Congregations of LDS all having been taught the [anti-gay-marriage] doctrine in July so that they may see the importance of fundraising and grassroots participation …

To both Packers, it’s all about activating LDS cells, lighting the dry kindling, finally seeing a return on the years of investment in correlation and vertical integration that have brought us to this point.

I don’t really know what to say after seeing those videos. They both made me sick to stomach, though in different ways. The first one made me so angry I caught my fingers curling on the mouse. As for the second one… The position of the makers of this video, and certainly their final suggestion, what they feel is the “only way out” – that literally turned my stomach. It scares me that people exist who think this way. And I am not an Obama supporter, so it’s not about that. It’s the paranoia followed by the truly useless suggestion to turn your will over to the Sky Father instead of making authentic choices. That upsets me more than I can explain.

Though I might not agree with everything therein, the labeling of the guys who created the 2nd video as the “same Arizona” crew for the first one is more than a bit erroneous.

For the record, I know the two blokes who created the second video (yes, just 2 guys) – the “One Way Out” video. One lives in the SLC valley, the other in Colorado and are in no way connected with the church. Though it is amusing to see the mistaken insinuations of this or that direct contact with LDS, Inc., NOM, or something altogether unrelated, perhaps a little research on the matter might do a LOT of good.

Now, as to the content, it’s my belief that too many of our assumptions of government are based off our preconceived notions of what a particular party does/champions. LDS members predominantly align with the Republican party because of, largely, the Reed Smoot episode. The Republicans came at them hard and so the members morphed into uber-Republican supporters. This was predated with the uber-American morphing, when the Articles of Faith were voted in as “scripture” to coincide with the whole polygamy issue. Now, in today’s world, LDS are taken back by the whole evangelical attacks and are trying to morph into an uber-mainstream Christian organization.

Turning to politics, GWB may have professed to be a Christian, may have even claimed to hear God’s voice directing him to war, but a claim doesn’t mean a truth, no matter how we spin it. You can dig up plenty of info on the whole Bush family to realize it’s little more than a carefully designed ruse to convince the evangelical voting block to keep them in power, to say nothing of the other deeds they have profited from dating back to the early 1900s. Reagan may be perceived as a “small gov’t” beauty to the right wingers of this world – a pseudo-Savior if you will – but the truth behind his moves and persona is anything but (though that could likely be said about most of us). Again, the claim doesn’t = the truth, at least not necessarily.

I also don’t think the 2nd video had anything to do with a theocracy, though in hindsight I can see the connection. I actually see it as an appeal at a personal level – i.e., no matter what happens and who the corporateers elect as the “savior du jour” for the masses, it won’t really matter. Two wings of the same bird, IMO. To each his own…then again, in today’s world that disagreement usually means you’ll lambaste me for disagreeing with you. So be it.

Plus, as one apparently belonging to the “ungovernable” and “uneducated segment” of society, it’s always fun to see the “governable” and “educated” segment lob their bevy of euphemisms around to those who are in general agreement. Chino’s “sense of the aim” of the 2nd video, or the creators of the 2nd video, couldn’t be more mistaken…though that is neither here no there.

tom – you say your buddies “are in no way connected with the church.” You mean, other than being members, right? For what it’s worth, I do appreciate you coming around and providing your info and POV. I just happen to think the vid is a LOL example of what’s been called The Paranoid Style in American Politics.

Chino: they are both members. Though, the insinuation that they belong to the NOM is still laughable and yet to be addressed. Feel free to contact them directly if you wish…They’d enjoy the perspective and give-and-take. Perhaps there could be some understanding gained by both sides. Without having the time to read the Paranoid article, I wholly agree with the title. I’m mostly apolitical, and side with the likes of Strike Anywhere on how they view the political spectrum. (As in this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivKgQ4R4K7k).

Hellmut: I have no idea why some criticism reverberates more loudly than others. Though a more recent example would be the polygamy issue. Thanks to the FLDS fiasco in Texas (not to mention Big Love), the LDS hierarchy and members quickly jumped to the side of the law, denouncing polygamy, championing law and order…and this is only reinforced by the likes of Hinckley proclaiming, “I don’t think it’s doctrinal.” So be it. Prior to 1890 and the voting in of the Articles of Faith as scripture, the church was much more aligned with the “obey God rather than man.” Now, the church has sought political alliances of all shapes and sizes in order to foster growth. This has been going on for years and has only been strengthened in the last 20 years (Nelson and Huntsman cuddling up with Armand Hammer comes to mind). I don’t likely see anything changing in the near term with the way the hierarchy is currently entrenched in their positions, absent some cataclysmic event (and I’m not talking about earth events). Predictive linguistics suggest religion in general is going to go through the crapper in the next few years, whether it’s because of the issues facing the Catholic church, or something else we can’t yet see. Religion is in a strange place these days, and deservedly so. Men have hijacked religion in the name of profits or power or both it would seem. (Religion being the way men interpret scriptures and force people to align within a certain box of beliefs, nearly forbidding their adherents from thinking outside the box and going outside the box of their defined hierarchy).

I’m not sure I’d say the main body of the church (and hierarchy) is becoming more traditionalist. If anything, I’d suggest they’re becoming less and less dogmatic, but not in the traditional sense. They’re leaning much more heavily on modernity and much less on historicity. For example, the gospel according to the likes of McConkie, Hinckley, Benson or Monson (just to name a few) is oftentimes in stark contradiction to the gospel as restored in the 1800s. Whether its the fundamentalists believing they are right and have the authority, or the modern “revelators” saying “Follow the brethren, we’ll never lead you astray.” It seems to come down to a game of duality and trying to pigeon hole “God” into someone who supports your positions.

tom: If you got a laugh, that’s pretty much the point of this post. Notice the “conspiracy theory” tag? Let me lay it out for you: Your buddies used Mark Mabry’s photography, and everybody knows Mark is tight with the folks who run the Mesa Easter Pageant, and since a bunch of folks from that pageant were stars in NOM’s “Gathering Storm” ad, they all must be part of the same group. And since everyone is Mormon, it must all have something to do with getting Mitt Romney elected President.

Insinuation 101 was my favorite course at the John Birch School of Journalism. I think your friends must have taken the same class.

I noticed the photography of Christ was courtesy of Mark Mabry. He’s the guy behind highly emotionally manipulative photos and videos of Brother Jesus:http://www.reflectionsofchrist.org/

A Mormon family member put this DVD on at a family gathering and I nearly fell out of my chair listening to the BYU professor talking about how we can “feel the Spirit” because of music. Well, yes, you can enhance an emotional response to images with music.

Spurred by this post, I wrote up an article about Glenn Beck and his responsibility for much of the apocalyptic and paranoid sentiments like those expressed by Mormons in the “An Invitation to America” video.

I think many of you would be interested in the article, so I’d appreciate it if you’d check it out. Thanks!

Jon, I’m glad you do point out that the brethren do occasionally take on the far right as “deceivers.” I guess there comes a point when trusting in Jesus and Jesus ONLY to calm tsunamis and volcanoes takes authority out of the hands of church leaders.

to pop up around “Jesus Christ” when it flashed on the video (font was a dead on match!). I knew – really KNEW – that the Mormon PR machine would never, ever put out something like this. This is too controversial for conservative ol’ LDS Inc. But it is soooo Mormon! (FYI, I caught the food storages as well and it totally cracked me up!)

How a personal relationship with JC is going to help anyone survive in the new commie-fascist-corporate/capitalist-globalized-new-world-order (oh the irony in lumping all of those together), I have no idea. But the video did make me laugh… in a WTF kind of way.

If the authors don’t want a theocracy (okay, who are we kidding, they want a Mormon theocracy led by Jesus who is going to usher it in when he returns to the New Jerusalem with the Second Coming; wink, wink, nod, nod), what do they want? They criticize: socialism, communism, fascism, democracy, big government, world orders, etc.

Oh, I know, I know the answer to this: They want a mythical past right after the ink dried on The Constitution when the streets were paved with individualistic opportunity, people were gullible enough to believe someone like Joseph Smith could find buried treasure by looking at peepstones in a hat, everyone had morals (and slaves), and women were property. Sounds like a real dream to me. Halcyon Days… That’s what the video should have been called. Halcyon Days.

On the “Valentine marriage” thing:
All due respect to the lady’s assertion–I don’t think the LDS Church “threatened” to excommunicate her. The Church doesn’t operate that way. They might express displeasure–but not likely even that. Excommunication works a lot like things under civil process. She might be notified by her Bishop or Stake authorities of displeasure with her actions, but unless she were openly and publicly defiant of those authorities–and of the Church itself–she never was in danger of excommunication. I am assuming of course that this video was her ONLY problem, and that there was not some deeper, more outrageous behavior or defiance on her part. Sorry–I don’t buy it…!